This online supplement is produced and published by Rossiyskaya Gazeta
(Russia), which takes sole responsibility for the content.

Gazprom's Okhta Centre skyscraper in St Petersburg

Svetlana Kononova, Special to Russia Profile

5:35PM GMT 05 Nov 2009

St Petersburg, home town of both Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev, has become a battleground after the go-ahead was given for the construction of the 396-metre high Okhta Centre. The skyscraper (161 metres taller than London’s Canary Wharf tower), which will be owned by Gazprom, will be on the right bank of the Neva river, in front of the Smolny Cathedral.

Unesco has asked Russia to halt construction of the centre, saying the tower “could affect the outstanding universal value of the historical centre of St Petersburg and related groups of monuments”.

The organisation warned that the skyscraper would place St Petersburg on the list of endangered World Heritage sites in 2010. Likewise, representatives of Russia’s Hermitage Museum and the St Petersburg Union of Architects have spoken out against the business centre.

The British architectural company RMJM has designed the building, nicknamed the “gas-scraper” in the Russian media. With a budget of $2.4bn, the Okhta Centre’s main structure is supposed to be completed by 2012. The whole complex will be finished by 2016.

The project’s chief architect, Philipp Nikandrov, believes that “Unesco should not only protect the existing world heritage, but also acquiesce to the creation of new world heritage”.

Related Articles

He believes that the Okhta Centre should become the new symbol of St Petersburg, and a part of the global architectural heritage. Nikandrov pointed out numerous benefits the new business centre would bring to the city.

First, after the Gazprom headquarters move to St Petersburg, the city budget would receive a boost from the company’s taxes. The centre will lure new investors and business into the city, and create more than 10,000 new jobs.

Second, the building would attract tourists. There will be a viewing point on the 67th floor, which could become the main tourist attraction in the city.

“Two and a half million tourists visit St Petersburg every year,” Nikandrov said, “but this number seems to be quite small in comparison with the London Eye, which is visited by 2.6m tourists annually, or the Eiffel tower, which is visited by 7m.”

Additionally, construction of the Okhta Centre would improve the infrastructure of the Krasnogvardeysky district in eastern St Petersburg. There are industrial operations in the area that have a negative impact on the environment and pollute the air and soil. When construction of the centre is complete, manufacturing facilities will be moved out.

However, most of St Petersburg’s inhabitants oppose the project. According to a recent poll conducted by TOY-Opinion Research Company and ECOM Centre of Expertise, 66pc of respondents would vote against building the tower.

Forty pc said they “categorically object” and 26pc said that they are “somewhat against” it. Seven pc support the project “entirely”, and 13pc said they are “fairly” supportive of it.

Activists from the Live City movement are convinced that Gazprom’s project is being implemented in violation of the law and without public opinion being taken into consideration. Live City would like to see the skyscraper moved to either uptown or the suburbs.

“The main problem of the project is that it is in violation of land use and development rules,” said Julia Minutina, a Live City coordinator.

“Buildings should not be taller than 100 metres near the city centre. The Okhta Centre would negatively affect the classical panoramas of St Petersburg. As soon as one developer breaks the rules, others will follow suit. It might lead to city-planning anarchy,” she added.

Elizaveta Istomina, another member of Live City, agreed. “With its architectural-historical environment, St Petersburg is like a living organism with own genetic code,” she said.

“The new skyscraper seems to be absolutely inappropriate. It will look as ugly as a giant cancerous tumour destroying this living organism.”

“Construction of new skyscrapers in big cities is an inevitable process,” said Elena Vlasova, a city planner at the Bureau Bos, an international architectural company.

“Tall buildings further the city’s development. Their appearance leads to an increase in land and property prices and attracts investors which, in turn, bring economic benefits to the city.”

Vlasova believes that Russian city planners and the government should take into consideration international experience in regulating the construction of skyscrapers.

A number of big cities have their own historical and cultural heritage sites, but proper solutions on building skyscrapers without damaging the city’s unique character can always be found.